This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

I beleive my opinion has remained consistant. I am an American first and hope things turn out best for the country rather than hope for failure of some American endevor due to the politics of hte administration in charge.

I don't know if Bush2 used drones to the extent Obama is using them. Or more accurately probably, is that there is little difference in how either of them used drones. That's probably because of once again the racist hate for Obama while Bush2 using drones was either mostly ignored or even applauded by some.

So what's the difference other than many American haters and racists now have a black president to hate?

Are the racists ever embarrassed over being told the obvious?

But estimated numbers have been compiled by other sources. As Klaidman points out,
by the time Obama accepted his Nobel Peace Prize 11 months into his presidency, he'd already ordered more drone strikes than George W. Bush had in his entire presidency. By the end of 2012, he'd ordered six times as many strikes in Pakistan as Bush had

So, it's about as I expected. Obama has resorted to drones more than Bush2. Which makes it abundantly clear that Bush2 was resorting to killing whole villages with indiscriminate use of cruise missiles more than using drones.

Some haters will never admit they are driven by politics and racism.

And no, Obama should have never won the Nobel prize when it's obvious that he was using drones or any other method to kill people, even though he was using the least destructive method available and keeping the 'collateral' killing to a minimum.

So, it's about as I expected. Obama has resorted to drones more than Bush2. Which makes it abundantly clear that Bush2 was resorting to killing whole villages with indiscriminate use of cruise missiles more than using drones.

Yes, distinguishing between civilians and terrorists is important, perhaps that should be done before a drone attack is launched.

you posed the hypothetical that terrorists would acquire drone technology and cause collateral damage to US civilians while pursuing legitimate targets. I pointed out how your theory was silly, being that the dominate characteristic of terrorism is to actively pursue civilian targets.